After Brexit: Australia's relations with the EU and the UK. Issue 4 (20th October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Allison-Reumann, Laura
• Is Part Of: Global affairs. Volume 5:Issue 4/5(2019)
• Page Start: 567
• Page End: 573
• Publication Date: 2019-10-20
• Subjects: Brexit -- Australia -- EU -- UK -- Nostalgia; International relations -- Periodicals; World politics -- Periodicals; Geopolitics -- Periodicals; 327.05
• DOI: 10.1080/23340460.2020.1714466
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2334-0460

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Australia's relations with the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) have progressed significantly since the UK's decision to leave the EU in 2016. Relations with one have not been privileged over the other, and while there have been intermittent debates framed around a more historical rationale for the pursuance of Australia-UK relations post-Brexit, pragmatism has prevailed over nostalgic decisions thus far. However, as Brexit is far from resolved, this article argues that neither Australia nor the UK should be tempted to use nostalgia as a political tool moving forward. It also argues that Australia, the UK and the EU should take a cautious approach to basing future relations on their "like-mindedness" and "support for the rules-based order" and that this should be handled judiciously, and with analytical depth and reflection. Key points Australia has made progress in consolidating and developing its relations with the EU and the UK since the UK's referendum on Brexit in 2016. Moving forward, nostalgia as a political tool should be avoided. Australia, thus far, has managed to do this, despite intermittent debates framed around a more historical rationale for the relations post-Brexit. A pragmatic approach to Australia's relations with the EU and the UK would offer more opportunities and be in the interests of all parties. Basing relations on terms such as "like-mindedness" and "support for the rules-based order" and objectives such as working together in the Indo- or Asia-Pacific need to be approached with care and analytical depth. "A" rules-based order should be supported, rather than "the" rules-based order.